Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Living in Switzerland > Swiss politics/news  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #361  
Old 19.09.2019, 12:50
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
My opinion is that a birth is not a legal or moral discontinuity in a child's life. Not sure why you're actually invoking other persons' rights here or everyone else's opinion because everyone else's opinion is neither logic nor science.
Why does your opinion count more than "everyone else's"?
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #362  
Old 19.09.2019, 12:50
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 13,259
Groaned at 216 Times in 191 Posts
Thanked 19,334 Times in 7,869 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
Quote:
View Post
You can do what you like with your own body, but can't do what you like with the body that's growing inside your body. Which is also reflected in law.
So why aren't the people who are anti-abortion also campaigning to make it illegal to sell pregnant women cigarettes, alcohol and sushi, amongst other products that endanger a pregnancy?
They don't need to. Doctors are already advising people on these things. And abortion definitely harms unborn babies - not everyone is convinced about the others. I guess the idea is that once abortion has been banned they'll work on the other things. You know, step by step. Thin end of the wedge etc.

Quote:
Which law states that?
The law says you can't have an abortion, with a few exceptions after x weeks (where x varies by country). Therefore after x weeks you can't have an abortion and the law is saying that you can't. I.e. after x weeks of pregnancy a woman can no longer do what she likes with her own body.

Which was the only point I was making, in response to the statement that no-one can tell anyone what do to with their own body. Yes they can, and it is written into law.

Sorry I wasn't clear enough.
__________________
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!
This user would like to thank NotAllThere for this useful post:
  #363  
Old 19.09.2019, 12:55
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
And abortion definitely harms unborn babies - not everyone is convinced about [cigarettes and alcohol]
Now you're definitely pulling our legs.
This user groans at for this post:
  #364  
Old 19.09.2019, 12:57
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
They don't need to. Doctors are already advising people on these things. And abortion definitely harms unborn babies - not everyone is convinced about the others.

The law says you can't have an abortion, with a few exceptions after x weeks (where x varies by country). Therefore after x weeks you can't have an abortion and the law is saying that you can't. I.e. after x weeks of pregnancy a woman can no longer do what she likes with her own body.

Which was the only point I was making, in response to the statement that no-one can tell anyone what do to with their own body. Yes they can, and it is written into law.

Sorry I wasn't clear enough.
In CH? Or elsewhere? Which law?

In the UK it's perfectly legal up until 23 weeks 6 days and afterwards for certain medical conditions.

I understand the week/foetus age restrictions however by the time that point is passed, the decision to keep the baby has likely been made. Sovereignty over your own body is maintained.

No woman in the UK would be forced to carry a baby to term if to do so would be detrimental to her mental or physical health.
The following 2 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #365  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:24
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 10,732
Groaned at 346 Times in 282 Posts
Thanked 15,640 Times in 8,014 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Maybe some people will never change their opinions and that's all right.
I would be really worried if there would be serious talks and steps towards changing some laws e.g. Alabama style.
This user would like to thank greenmount for this useful post:
  #366  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:27
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vaud
Posts: 1,457
Groaned at 114 Times in 74 Posts
Thanked 1,586 Times in 898 Posts
yacek has a reputation beyond reputeyacek has a reputation beyond reputeyacek has a reputation beyond reputeyacek has a reputation beyond reputeyacek has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
I don't understand what you mean here. Please clarify?
That the same assumptions and laws apply to a child before and after birth, including considerations for mother's laws.
  #367  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:43
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
My opinion it that a birth is not a legal or moral discontinuity in a child's life. Not sure why you're actually invoking other persons' rights here or everyone else's opinion because everyone else's opinion is neither logic nor science.

Quote:
View Post
That the same assumptions and laws apply to a child before and after birth, including considerations for mother's laws.
Ok. But that is your opinion, not the law. To say that a foetus which is, fundamentally, a parasite that cannot exist without its host for 24 ish weeks, is the same as a birthed baby person who can function independently is, to my mind, flawed thinking. They are not the same at all. That is my opinion and thankfully it is backed up by law.

Which mother's laws? Women are either people who have the right to control their own bodies, particularly with regard to what is and isn't inside them, or they are not and they do not.

Do you think it reasonable to force your (non-specific use of 2nd person pronoun here) partner / daughter to carry a baby if they did not want to, for whatever reason?
  #368  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:51
Ouchboy's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Baden
Posts: 3,289
Groaned at 48 Times in 43 Posts
Thanked 5,530 Times in 2,118 Posts
Ouchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

The idea of life starting at conception or not is irrelevant.


The issue of autonomy of body over the life of another being is what matters, regardless of the circumstances of the dependancy of the other person/fetus/parasite.


So that point is moot.
  #369  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:52
bigblue2's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Glarus
Posts: 8,089
Groaned at 485 Times in 404 Posts
Thanked 14,715 Times in 5,780 Posts
bigblue2 has a reputation beyond reputebigblue2 has a reputation beyond reputebigblue2 has a reputation beyond reputebigblue2 has a reputation beyond reputebigblue2 has a reputation beyond reputebigblue2 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
Ok. But that is your opinion, not the law. To say that a foetus which is, fundamentally, a parasite that cannot exist without its host for 24 ish weeks, is the same as a birthed baby person who can function independently is, to my mind, flawed thinking. They are not the same at all. That is my opinion and thankfully it is backed up by law.
my son is 20 years old and still can't function independently, what options do I have?
The following 4 users would like to thank bigblue2 for this useful post:
  #370  
Old 19.09.2019, 13:53
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 13,259
Groaned at 216 Times in 191 Posts
Thanked 19,334 Times in 7,869 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
Now you're definitely pulling our legs.
OK, ciggies yes. But the odd glass of wine, sushi, blue cheeses... ?
Quote:
In CH? Or elsewhere? Which law?
Exactly this one.
Quote:
In the UK it's perfectly legal up until 23 weeks 6 days and afterwards for certain medical conditions.
Quote:
I understand the week/foetus age restrictions however by the time that point is passed, the decision to keep the baby has likely been made. Sovereignty over your own body is maintained.
It might not have been. Some of the more extreme pro-choice people do argue for abortion up to term, for any reason. So they obviously think that sovereignty isn't maintained.

Quote:
No woman in the UK would be forced to carry a baby to term if to do so would be detrimental to her mental or physical health.
After 23 weeks and 6 days it's possible they would, if continuation did not meet anyone of these requirements as determined by two doctors:

1. Prevention of grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman;
2. Risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated;
3. Substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

TL;DR There are circumstances where the law does not allow a woman to do what she likes with her own body. That's just a fact.
__________________
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!
  #371  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:09
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
my son is 20 years old and still can't function independently, what options do I have?
Can you not just forge his signature on a voluntary euthanasia application? From reading some of the above comments, it would appear that that would be no different from having an abortion to avoid the 20 years of pain.
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #372  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:13
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ZH
Posts: 7,789
Groaned at 91 Times in 72 Posts
Thanked 11,935 Times in 4,845 Posts
doropfiz has a reputation beyond reputedoropfiz has a reputation beyond reputedoropfiz has a reputation beyond reputedoropfiz has a reputation beyond reputedoropfiz has a reputation beyond reputedoropfiz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
That the same assumptions and laws apply to a child before and after birth, including considerations for mother's laws.
There are differences, though, in the assumptions and laws that apply to the amount of resources that are necessary for the care, before and after birth.

Though some women are ill throughout their pregnancy, this is not the norm.
Some babies receive medical treatment while still in the womb, but they, too, are the exceptions.

Most unborn babies do not, in fact, cost very much to maintain. The pregnant woman needs extra resources (more food, more rest, etc.), but the unborn baby is, in its own being, more or less "free", as in: does not consume resources directly, by itself.

As soon as it is born though, the costs - of all kinds - begin. The child then has its own needs and wishes, and its environment has to deal with those.

This, as I see it, is a central and significant difference between "the assumptions and laws [that] apply ... before and after birth".

It is also the point at which there seems to be way too little support for women who have become pregnant against their will or in difficult circumstances. The pro-life people I have spoken to are all for encouraging the woman to see the preganancy through to full term and to give birth... but then... oh, then she's on her own with the baby, without support, financial or other, for feeding and clothing and nurturing that growing child. To me, that seems so terribly inconsistent. It is more pro-unborn than pro-ongoing-life.

Last edited by doropfiz; 19.09.2019 at 19:23.
This user would like to thank doropfiz for this useful post:
  #373  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:21
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
my son is 20 years old and still can't function independently, what options do I have?
Invent time travel?
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #374  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:23
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post


It might not have been. Some of the more extreme pro-choice people do argue for abortion up to term, for any reason. So they obviously think that sovereignty isn't maintained.


TL;DR There are circumstances where the law does not allow a woman to do what she likes with her own body. That's just a fact.

That is why those opinions are extreme.

No. It's your interpretation. I have the right to.do with my reproductive system what I wish. End of.

Edit: have just seen Ace's post. Trolling , much? If you can't figure out the difference there then ...

Last edited by RufusB; 19.09.2019 at 14:27. Reason: Jeebers
  #375  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:48
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 13,259
Groaned at 216 Times in 191 Posts
Thanked 19,334 Times in 7,869 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
That is why those opinions are extreme.

No. It's your interpretation. I have the right to.do with my reproductive system what I wish. End of.

Edit: have just seen Ace's post. Trolling , much? If you can't figure out the difference there then ...
The logic is simple. It has nothing to do with morals, interpretations, or anything, except what the law actually says.

If you want an abortion at 39 weeks in the UK, and all of these apply you can't have one.
1. Your mental or physical health is not at grave risk of permanent injury
2. The chances of dying while having an abortion is greater than the chances of you dying if you continue.
3. There isn't a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

Before 24 weeks, there has to be a risk of mental or physical injury. Technically, therefore, there are even restrictions there. It is, however, generally accepted that continuing with an unwanted pregnancy has a risk of mental injury, so de facto, up to 24 weeks, you can do what you like. But not de jure.

These criteria are written into the Abortion Act. Ergo, whether you like it or not, a woman's right to do what she likes with her reproductive system, is not unrestricted in UK law.

That is fact. Not opinion.
__________________
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!
  #376  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:54
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
The logic is simple. It has nothing to do with morals, interpretations, or anything, except what the law actually says.

If you want an abortion at 39 weeks in the UK, and all of these apply you can't have one.
1. Your mental or physical health is not at grave risk of permanent injury
2. The chances of dying while having an abortion is greater than the chances of you dying if you continue.
3. There isn't a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

Before 24 weeks, there has to be a risk of mental or physical injury. Technically, therefore, there are even restrictions there. It is, however, generally accepted that continuing with an unwanted pregnancy has a risk of mental injury, so de facto, up to 24 weeks, you can do what you like. But not de jure.

These criteria are written into the Abortion Act. Ergo, whether you like it or not, a woman's right to do what she likes with her reproductive system, is not unrestricted in UK law.

That is fact. Not opinion.

Any.woman suddenly deciding to have an abortion at plus 30 weeks is, I would say, likely to fulfill criteria 1.

There are always options. I believe you are being deliberately obtuse on this point.

There is always choice.
  #377  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:56
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 13,259
Groaned at 216 Times in 191 Posts
Thanked 19,334 Times in 7,869 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
I believe you are being deliberately obtuse on this point.
How ironic.
This user would like to thank NotAllThere for this useful post:
  #378  
Old 19.09.2019, 14:58
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SG
Posts: 8,959
Groaned at 472 Times in 353 Posts
Thanked 11,919 Times in 6,196 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
my son is 20 years old and still can't function independently, what options do I have?
Use him as your personal organ donor. At long last he's good for something.
  #379  
Old 19.09.2019, 15:03
Belgianmum's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Neuchâtel
Posts: 13,056
Groaned at 228 Times in 192 Posts
Thanked 21,561 Times in 8,834 Posts
Belgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
The logic is simple. It has nothing to do with morals, interpretations, or anything, except what the law actually says.

If you want an abortion at 39 weeks in the UK, and all of these apply you can't have one.
1. Your mental or physical health is not at grave risk of permanent injury
2. The chances of dying while having an abortion is greater than the chances of you dying if you continue.
3. There isn't a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

Before 24 weeks, there has to be a risk of mental or physical injury. Technically, therefore, there are even restrictions there. It is, however, generally accepted that continuing with an unwanted pregnancy has a risk of mental injury, so de facto, up to 24 weeks, you can do what you like. But not de jure.

These criteria are written into the Abortion Act. Ergo, whether you like it or not, a woman's right to do what she likes with her reproductive system, is not unrestricted in UK law.

That is fact. Not opinion.
You’re just being deliberately obstropolous now ( ore obstreperous if you prefer) but go ahead if that’s what makes you happy.

Personally I think it makes you look like a jerk.
This user would like to thank Belgianmum for this useful post:
  #380  
Old 19.09.2019, 15:08
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Laderach (Läderach)... run by anti-gay and anti-abortion religious fundamentalist

Quote:
View Post
How ironic.
Ah. The eye roll. Is that the new mic drop?

You've clearly never been a pregnant woman in the UK.
Closed Thread

Tags
chocolate, laderach, lindt, sprungli




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anti female or anti English Toontoon Daily life 129 23.02.2015 10:36
Anti Bark Collar and other anti bark tips... MaybeeSkint Pet corner 24 30.07.2014 15:07
Anti Anti Thread Confloozed Complaints corner 54 01.02.2012 12:22
[Internet] FREE Anti Virus by Microsoft sagarbm21 General off-topic 21 01.10.2009 15:42
Managed anti-spam and anti-virus service for individual domain-owners spamchek Commercial 0 13.05.2005 11:22


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0